Put yourself in his shoes, seriously what would you do?

I'd rather not say, but it is a recognized school in the southwest.

I have a friend who goes to Boston College, and as of two weeks ago (i.e. right around when classes were ending) a third of his class was without internships.

I think at that point the best option might be to find a friend who has their own business and see if they can possibly "create" an internship role for themself there?

Following up on what I said above, I know someone who interned for a very small start-up (three people in whole company, all friends of his) and he actually got a lot out of it even though he was working with friends. He landed a job coming out of school w/ a Fortune 100 doing industry finance work.

I agree with most of what Pelihu said.

Is it a given/is it always expected that students at tier II schools do internships in the summer? I think its a fact that there are fewer internship spots out there than full-time openings.

Along with Peli and Johnny, I would create my own internship of some kind. Volunteer work, going back to an old employer, doing a project for friends. Something like that.

I agree with what several have already said- try to find a way to create your own summer internship even if it is unpaid.

I would also try to determine the underlying cause of rejection:
1. Is it merely bad luck/timing/market cycle?
2. Lack of prior exerperience?
3. Is it a matter of a poorly written resume?
4. Weak interview skills?

We should always be mindful of the sunk cost fallacy, but most likely there is a net incremental benefit from completing the degree.

I would also look at possible reasons for failing to get an intership. I would also seriously consider dropshipping on eBay as an entrepreneurship option. It's very easy to get started and even I have sold 3 items this way , never made a profit though. But I always felt like James Bond whenever I explained to my friends and family what I was upto. Almost no capital required to start if you have already have a computer and an internet connection. If you only want to do it for the summer, fine because you can quit whenever you want to. If you want to continue, that's fine too.

In case dropshipping is a new term to some of you,
https://onlinebusiness.about.com/od/star ... ipping.htm

I think he should try to get hold of any job either now or in the fall, either volunteer or paid, either startup / entrepreneur / with friends or anything.

Additionally, what exactly is tier - II? Is it like Near Elite? Near Elite Frontier? Beyond? top 100 - top 200?

Thanks. L.

I don't know about everyone else, but each time I read a post like this it makes me panic. I always think what if I am the one in this type of situation or what if 2009 happens to be a period of recession.

Sorry, this may be a little unrelated to the topic.

If you are interested in doing something of your own and have some background in advertising (i dont), take a look at the online advertising business. Its growing like crazy.

Compared to the 90's, setting up a business over the internet today is fairly cheap with very robust open source (and hence free) solutions (e.g, mysql) available today. Hosting will probably require good investment, but hosting companies are falling over each other trying to offer ridiculous amounts of storage and services for a reasonable price.

As for IT staff, just buy macs for your employees.

Near elite frontier. His school perenially ranks somewhere between #40 and #50 on biz week, floating in that second cluster under the top 30.

As he happens to be a former coworker, I can personally attest that his interview skills are fine, if not exceptional. The only hitch I can think of is that he went from a human resources background (which he excelled at) to a marketing related internship (which he has absolutely no experience). Nevertheless, isn't the fundamental nature of an internship to help students establish some experience? Especially for career switchers?

Thanks for the clarification. So it's above the accredited-but-never-heard-of group of schools (which in this classification would be Tier III and below).



I agree that an internship at the desired post - MBA career should help make the move. However, I also think that there's a reason why there are so many people trying to get into the top programs (Ultra - Elite / Elite) and there are relatively less people competing for spots at lower clustered programs. Or to make it simple, there's a reason for selectivity and yield rates.

When you check the schools (tier I and tier II), you'll find out that most schools in the top 50s (or even the majority in the 100s) have nice facilities, good professors, a good program with some strengths and some weaknesses and lots of extracurricular options. Most of these programs have a fairly balanced class mix, with a reasonable representation of locals and internationals to provide a "global feel" to the experience. You can even find schools in the top 50 - 100 with better facilities than some in the Ultra Elite cluster.

However, what distinguishes the schools in the higher clusters and make them so desirable to applicants is the career options an MBA program from such a school provides.

Couple your friend's example with the example Johnny provided, and you find a coincidence. Add a few more and you see a pattern, which is:

- several people in Tier II schools manage to get a job they like.
- They still have worse odds at getting such a job than people attending Tier I schools do. The only exception would be a job in the schools' local region, but even in this case I would argue that applying for such a job from an Ultra - Elite or Elite should still yield better results than applying from the local Tier II school.

L.

I agree with Lepium. There is a very good reason why everyone would like to cram into an elite or ultra-elite school. There are definite differences in terms of opportunities and future prospects.

As we have discussed elsewhere around this forum, it's a no-brainer to attend an ultra-elite business school. People at these schools will have access to the most desirable jobs. Those at HBS, Warton, etc. actually look at McKinsey & Goldman as backup choices in case they aren't able to land juicy positions with hedge funds or venture capital firms. These schools have virtually no limitation in terms of industry or geography (even international). There's almost no need to consider opportunity cost because no matter how well someone is doing before they get into these schools, they will benefit and do even better when the come out.

The elite schools are almost a no-brainer for most people. People at elites will have a tougher time accessing super-selective industries like HF/VC/PE, but will be prime candidates for jobs at all of the traditional top MBA employers. Some schools in this range may be more limited in terms of industry or location, but students at these schools truly land jobs all around the country and world in all functions. Some thought might need to be given to opportunity cost, but for most people there's not much to think about.

The near-elite schools have more limitations that higher ranked schools. Generally speaking, the limitations are related to both industry and location. UNC always comes to mind as the perfect example for this range. They compete for some of the same jobs at Duke grads in certain industries, but the further you get away from NC, and away from the south, the less opportunities are available to UNC grads. People attending schools in this range need to have a clear focus on what they want to do and where they want to work before going. Someone that wants to work in entertainment in LA might be making a huge mistake by attending UNC. Businesses that hire MBAs have strong ties to their regional MBA programs. I believe that some of the students at these schools can compete for some of the top MBA jobs; whereas nearly all students at schools in the top two clusters can at least compete for nearly all the top jobs.

The further down you move, the more limited the MBA is. If an MBA from an ultra-elite can swing open virtually every (business related) door, an MBA from a lower ranked school might only crack open a few doors in the local region. It's up to the student to push it open the rest of the way. Students attending these lower ranked schools need to have a very clear idea of what they want to do, where they want to work and how they will secure that job. Employers aren't going to be chasing after them as they would students at elites. People at lower ranked schools that are not prepared ahead of time or have unrealistic expectations about where they can work or the jobs that they have access to may be in for a shock. Going to these schools is anything but a no-brainer. The successful ones will have clear expectations of what they hope to get from their MBA experience and how they plan to achieve their goals.

Are you for real?

A lot of what you say is reasonable, but you seem to go into some holistic fog when you perceive life at an eltra elite. If people were to think that way then 90% of the class at those schools are going to be seriously disappointed. People from Harvard and Stanford and the like don't really do back-up, I wouldn't expect.

They have the possibility that it might happen, but little else. At HBS 15% go into VC / LBO / PE. 6% of Wharton go to jobs in PE, VC isn't even mentioned. Stanford tops out at 21% into the three, which may be helped by the selective nature and smaller class size. According to your presentation of facts, a lot of people are on their back-up choice.

24% Consult from Stanford, 9% random Finance including IB.
31% Consult from Wharton, 21% Corp Fin & M&A.
21% Consult from Harvard, 26% other Finance.

Considering that all the consultants won't be even at McKinsey, and same for Finance & Goldman, I can only imagine that, on your scale, 30% of graduates from H/S/W are suicidal over their job failure relative to expectation. "Ew... I have to work for Bear Stearns - I may as well clean toilets for a living".

Beyond that, if Consultancy is a back up to everyone wanting to go into PE & VC, then HBS and Wharton really want to work on their diversity.

Harvard & Stanford may well be habitual placement MBAs for PE firms (maybe VC also) which really skews the statistics. You have a hard time getting into PE period. I am not sure if you are presenting HBS & Wharton students as deluded, or belittling the acheivement of getting into PE & VC.

It is a stretch objective from any school, but the ultra elites might give you a footstool to make it more reachable. If you can reach it as a career, it is probably because your background before the MBA is more of a stepladder to access it.

I recently read a pretty compelling argument that given the current popularity of Investment Management, Hedge Funds, Private Equity and Venture Capital, Investment Banking is the natural back-up for those interested in finance who are unable to get those jobs. This definitely seems to be the case at Stanford which reports the following financial services placements:

Job / Base Salary / Signing Bonus / Other Guaranteed (all mean)

Diversified Financial Services 4% / 116,111 / 28,750 / 106,667
Hedge Funds 10% / 134,455 / 26,500 / 85,000
Investment Banking 5% / 97,083 / 35,455 / 141,000
Investment Management 6% / 121,214 / 22,727 / 61,667
Private Equity 9% / 135,000 / 20,075 / 96,263
Venture Capital 2% / 171,250 / NA / NA

Of course, first year compensation is a relatively minor factor for someone planning a career in one of these fields.

I draw my conclusion based on the current state of affairs, where Investment Banking (because of hours, pay, work conditions, etc.) takes a back seat to the other listed functions in finance. The fact that Stanford students are more than 5x more likely to land the "more desirable" jobs in HF/IM/PE/VC than a job in IB leads me to believe that IB is in fact a back-up choice for Stanford students that are interested in finance. Another way to look at it is that if 20-40% of the students at Cornell, Michigan & Duke, etc. go into IB, the only reason why an equal number or more Stanford students do not take such jobs is because they have better options.

I actually believe that a substantial potion of Stanford students will get their first choice of employment. Certainly, there are students at Stanford whose ambitions are to get to a top IB or consulting firm; but I believe most of the students are thinking bigger than that. Not obtaining a dream job does not mean students will wallow in abject disappointment as 3underscore suggests; but I think it's accurate to say that landing a job at McKinsey or Goldman is not the prize that most people at Stanford (or Harvard and Wharton) are dreaming about. If they can't get their first choice "dream job" then by definition, the job they take is a back-up.

Near a quarter of people from each of those three schools go into Consultancy. Which, according to your earlier comment, is undesirable. McKinsey, the consultant any consultant would kill family to work for, being second choice.

Only Stanford, which I brought to the table for you, has any kind of balance to suggest more are going into niche markets of Banking rather than main hub banks. It was nice of you to latch on to the only bit of evidence to support your "compelling argument" (it would be nice to see this, as it would likely make more sense than your defence of it). By all means, keep levering off Stanford, when you started off with Harvard and Wharton. Oops! Their data doesn't support your theory. Doesn't mean your wrong Pelihu. Lets just carry on with the sample set of one that actually fits your theory. For a lawyer you are awful good on spurious correlation.

Let me give you a hint - Chicago doesn't fit either. Kellogg doesn't. Columbia doesn't. MIT doesn't. Wharton didn't. Harvard didn't.

Stanford screws up on the consultancy part of your theory (the bit you now seem to be neglecting like an orphan), but gets through on the Banking side.

Let's not let facts get in the way of a good bit of misinformation though.

Are you really trying to tell me the hours are easier at a HF or in a PE house than in a bank? I cannot imagine that is the case - just that bank conditions are more publicised. These things are IB, just small, specialised ones. I can hardly imaging the conditions come into it, or hours. Pay is about the one thing, and it is hardly like anyone good leaves an IB because it doesn't pay well.

Just wanted to chime in on the Battle Royale between Pelihu and 3underscore. I read this on BW forum. It is from Alex Chu and he gives alot of great advice to MBA candidates.

"The whole "brand" thing didn't really make that much of an impact on me, as I had worked with boatloads of MBA alums from all schools, and knew that although some schools were better than others, it's all about the individuals. I just wanted to get into the best school I could, and that's about it - I was really young then, and the sooner I could get out of banking, the better. Prior to b-school, some of the most clueless douchebags I've ever worked with were HBS alums, but conversely some of the funniest and smartest people I've ever met were from HBS as well. Same with Wharton, Stanford, Columbia, Tuck, Sloan, etc. I guess I had the fortune of working very closely with lots of MBAs (and also many without MBAs) beforehand so I don't think my views changed *that* much. I saw firsthand before I even went to school how unimportant an MBA really is long-term (the only time anyone ever talked about b-school was if someone in the room like me was applying, and even then, some of the most cynical and jaded alums were HBS, Stanford and Wharton alums about the value of the degree as nothing more than a glorfied sabbatical).

Having said that, my views probably did change, but I don't think it was just because of b-school, but simply because two years passes by and you mature a little, and all that.

One thing about the era in which I graduated was that it did change a LOT of my classmates and friends at the various b-schools. We graduated in 2001 right before 9/11 - at a time when the market had crashed and companies were going bust, big companies firing en masse, consulting firms and investment banks recinding offers, and big recruiters undergoing scandal (i.e. Enron was still a huge recruiter of top MBAs in 2001 right when the ship was about to sink). We saw firsthand that in bad times, a top MBA really doesn't do jack to save your job - or even help you get a job if everything is falling apart. You are either lucky or not. Lots of unemployed Stanford, Wharton, HBS grads during that time period desperate for work, freaking out about making rent payments in NYC or SF, etc. The time period between 2001-03 was a very dark time for a lot of people, MBAs included. I got the post-MBA job I wanted, but after seeing so many friends go through hell, I knew I wasn't any better or good - just extremely lucky.

While I didn't think I would be set for life with a top MBA, as a student I had though that a top MBA would at least be a valuable insurance policy in bad times. The sh*tstorm of 2001 - 03 taught me that when times are bad, no one is immune.

As an alum, I realized that MBA alums from top schools are a dime a dozen. There's nothing particularly special about going to a top b-school really. It's a good thing to have, a nice pit stop in your life/career, but that's about it.

It does kind of come full circle - you go to a "brand" school, only to then realize that at the end of it all, it still comes down to you, the individual. It's easy and convenient to blame pedigree (or lack thereof), nationality, demographic profile, etc. for lack of success, when it's the hard truth of looking in the mirror at yourself and believing that it's all on YOU to make it happen (and hoping for luck along the way) that is what will allow you to succeed. Brands don't change you. You change you. Or to put it another way, it's not about what you *have*, it's about what you *do*. Character, integrity, discipline, vision and luck all matter more for success than anything else -- something that most people probably already know, but are somehow deluded into thinking otherwise when they are faced with the prospect of getting a top MBA."